UKC

Why, given that they are elected by the people who all have a vested interest, are MPs allowed to abstain?

I can understand why MPs wouldn’t vote for a general election right now but surely they should then vote against that motion?

Is it because abstentions aren’t officially recorded on their voting record?

It didn’t make any difference to the result tonight but it could in future decisions.

How can we encourage more people to vote if our MPs don’t lead by example?

Abstaining or voting against have the same effect in this vote, so there was no need to actually vote.

Yes I understand that.

But why abstain when you can vote against something?

In the general election case today/yesterday is it because Labour doesn’t want to be seen to be voting against a general election?

On a more general point, what’s the purpose of being in parliament if you don’t vote?

What would have happened if the Tory rebels had taken the soft option yesterday and abstained instead of risking their careers by voting to block a no deal?

While today’s vote didn’t hinge on MPs voting against the motion there’ll be a time when it might matter. Complacency can lead to unforeseen consequences, just ask all those remainers who couldn’t be bothered to vote in the referendum  because remain was bound to win.

They're just using their heads for a change. 

The result would have been different, because every postively-cast vote counted in that vote.

In the vote you are complaining about today, an abstention had the same effect as a positively-cast vote against. I thought you said you understood this?

Abstaining for this vote meant they didn't need to be in the Chamber for the vote, so could be off doing something more useful. Not all votes in Parliament require every MP to vote. And, because of the archaic voting practice of actually counting heads, every MP would need to be there to cast a vote if it was necessary. But it isn't necessary, so they aren't, and they can abstain.

My take on it is that after years of demanding an election many MPs don’t want it recorded (officially) that they voted against having one.

When you see the number of MPs who abstained it almighty like they were whipped into doing so.

They abstained ti give the option of voting for or against at a later date.

That is correct and well reported - certainly on Radio 5 Live it was mentioned many times in the run up to the vote.  The official labour line was to abstain and their MPs were (weakly) whipped to abstain.  Radio 5 Live were even interviewing a Labour MP whilst the vote was going on as they did not need to vote.

If constituents have not expressed an interest in an issue and the MP does not feel that they have had sufficient time to understand the detail of the legislation I can certainly see a good reason to abstain on motions.

I was surprised to see that my MP abstained on Tuesday despite being labour and generally loyal to the leader.